Search results

We study two-player games where one-sided asymmetric information can lead to either adverse or advantageous selection. We contrast behavior in these games with settings where both players are uninformed. We find stark differences, suggesting that subjects do account for endogenous selection effects. Removing strategic uncertainty increases the fraction of subjects who account for selection. Subjects respond more to adverse than advantageous selection. Using additional treatments where we vary payoff feedback, we connect this difference to learning. We also observe a significant fraction of subjects who appear to understand selection effects but do not apply that knowledge. (JEL C92, D82, D91)

AbstractThis research studies the effects of mortgage subsidies and asymmetric information in the US mortgage market. I exploit discontinuities in interest rates generated by pricing rules and find patterns consistent with advantageous selection. I estimate an industry model that highlights the relationship between mortgage subsidies, intermediary lenders' incentives, and borrowers' advantageous selection. The model shows that mortgage subsidies enable advantageous selection, creating a deadweight loss of $7.90 billion. The counterfactual analysis reveals that pricing borrowers' private information eliminates advantageous selection only if mortgages are not subsidized. Without the mortgage subsidy, pricing borrowers' private information improves efficiency by $728.58 million.